<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
    <title>Search Algorithms: PC</title>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"
          http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body>
<table bgcolor="maroon" border="1" width="95%">
    <tbody>
    <tr>
        <td><h2><font color="#ffffff">Search Algorithms: CPC </font></h2></td>
    </tr>
    </tbody>
</table>
<p><font color="#000000"><b></b></font><br>
    CPC (Conservative PC) is a variant of the PC algorithm designed to improve arrowhead orientation accuracy. The
    types of input data permitted and the assumptions for CPC are the same as for PC. That is, input data may be used
    that is either entirely discrete or entirely continuous. A DAG may be used as input, in which case graphical
    m-separation will be used in place of conditional independence for purposes of the search. It is assumed that the
    true causal DAG over which the search is being done does not contain cycles, that there are no hidden common causes
    between any pair of observed variables, and that with continuous variables the direct causal effect of any variable
    into any other is linear, with the distribution of each variable being Normal.</p>
<p>To know how to interpret the output of CPC, it helps to know how CPC differs from PC. In the collider orientation
    step, instead of orienting an unshielded triple &lt;X, Y, Z&gt; as a collider just in case (as in PC) Y is not in
    the set Sxz that shielded off X from Z and hence led to the remove of X---Z during the adjency phase of the search,
    &lt;X, Y, Z&gt; is first labeled as either a <em>collider</em>, a <em>noncollider, </em>or an <em>unfaithful
        triple</em>, depending, respectively, on whether Y is in <em>none</em> of the sets S among adjacents of X or
    adjacents of Y such that X _||_ Y | S, or <em>all</em> of those sets, or <em>some but not all</em> of those sets. If
    &lt;X, Y, Z&gt; is labeled as a collider then it is oriented as X--&gt;Y&lt;--Z; if it is labeled as a noncollider
    or unfaithful, these facts are noted for later use. (It is intended for unfaithful triples to be underlined in some
    way, but this is not implemented in the interface currently. However, by inspecting the logs, the classification of
    unshielded triples into colliderDiscovery, noncolliders, and unfaithful triples may be obtained.)</p>
<p>Once all colliderDiscovery have been marked and all other unshielded triples sorted properly, the Meek orientation
    rules are then applied as usual, with the exception that where these orientation rules require noncolliders, the
    fact that a triple is a noncollider is checked against the previously compiled classification of unshielded
    triples. </p>
<p>Whereas the output graph of PC is a <em>CPDAG</em> (allowing for bidirected edges in some cases where independence
    information conflicts with the assumptions of PC), the output graph of CPC is an <em>e-CPDAG</em> (with the same
    allowance). The e-CPDAG represents an equivalence class of DAGs that have the same adjacencies as the e-CPDAG,
    with every edge A--&gt;B in the e-CPDAG also in the DAG and every unshielded collider in the DAG either an
    unshielded collider in the e-CPDAG or marked as unfaithful in the e-CPDAG. (Currently, the interface in Tetrad
    does how show which triples are marked as unfaithful, but the logs, accessed through the Logging menu, provide this
    information.) </p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h3>References: </h3>
<p>Spirtes, Glymour, and Scheines (2000). Causation, Prediction, and Search.</p>
<p>Chris Meek (1995), &quot;Causal inference and causal explanation with background knowledge.&quot;</p>
Ramsey, Zhang, and Spirtes (2006). Adjacency-Faithfulness and Conservative Causal Inference. Uncertainty in Artificial
Intelligence, forthcoming.
<p>&nbsp;</p>
</body>
</html>
